Google does not have to delete sensitive information, says European court - final judgement not before the end of 2013 - by Juliette Garside

The European court of justice, where judges were asked to rule on whether Google should be treated under law as a publisher of information or simply a host. Photograph: Image Broker/Rex Features

Google is not obliged to delete personal information from its search results, even when that information damages an individual's reputation, an adviser to the European court of justice has decided.

In a long-running case about the "right to be forgotten" by search engines, judges have been asked to rule on whether Google should be treated under law as a publisher of information or simply a host.

The case is not due to conclude before the end of 2013 but if the court backs the adviser's findings it will spare Google from a flood of legal claims seeking the retraction of material from its searches.

The case is based on a complaint by Mario Costeja, a Spaniard who made a Google search of his name and found a newspaper announcement from 15 years earlier saying a property he owned was up for auction because of non-payment of social security contributions.

Costeja asked for the sensitive information to be deleted from Google's search results, arguing that his debts had been repaid and it was disproportionate that information that could damage his reputation with clients, employers or friends was so prominent so long after the event.

One of Spain's top courts upheld his complaint, deeming Google to be making money out of Costeja's personal data, and the case was referred to the European court of justice in March last year after Google challenged the decision.

Niilo Jääskinen, an advocate general of the European court of justice, said that companies operating in the European Union must adhere to national data protection legislation, but that did not oblige them to remove personal content produced by others.

Read more: Google does not have to delete sensitive information, says European court | Technology | The Guardian

European Union and Britain Wrangle Over Social Security Rules - by Andrew Higgens and Stephen Castle

In a move certain to stoke British frustrations with the European Union, the 27-nation bloc’s executive arm is taking Britain to court over restrictions on who can receive social security benefits.

The European Commission, announcing its decision on Thursday, took issue with Britain’s tight criteria for residency benefits, which differ from a Europe-wide standard meant to ensure support for any citizen of a European Union country who lives in another member country. As a result, it said, Britain has denied child support and other benefits to “potentially tens of thousands” of foreign citizens.

The British government promised to contest the case before the European Court of Justice, based in Luxembourg, saying it believed its rules complied with European Union laws. The case is unlikely to be heard for many months, but if the court rules against Britain, the country will have to amend its rules or face large fines.

The British standard for benefits, called “right to reside,” has been challenged in its own courts for years. The dispute with the commission has been brewing since 2010, and the decision to initiate court action is likely to stir the growing debate in Britain over its relationship with the European Union. 

If re-elected in 2015, Prime Minister David Cameron has promised to loosen British ties to the bloc, bringing back more decision-making to home legislators, and to hold a referendum by the end of 2017 on whether to remain a member.

Read more: European Union and Britain Wrangle Over Social Security Rules - NYTimes.com

EU Parliament caves in to US pressure and gives green light with a divided vote to providing constitutionally protected EU Citizens personal data to US authorities

The EU parliament has caved in to US pressure and approved a controversial law to provide constitutionally protected EU Citizens personal data to the US.  Regardless of the diplomatically worded statement by the EU parliamentary Center Right majority, the agreement is generally seen as greatly jeopardizing the EU Citizens right to personal data protection.

The EU-US Passenger Name Record (PNR) agreement was adopted with 409 votes in favor, 226 against and 33 abstentions. A considerable number of MEPs voted against the deal due to concerns over data protection safeguards. A proposal to refer the agreement to the European Court of Justice was rejected by the Center Right majority.

Following the vote, rapporteur Sophie in het Veld from ALDE ( the Netherlands) , withdrew her name from the report and said, "The decision of the European Parliament does not reflect my recommendation. Therefore I choose to distance myself from it. I consider it disappointing that after 9 years negotiating with one of our close friends and allies, the US, we only got an agreement that gets reluctant support from a divided House", she explained.

The Justice and Home Affairs Ministers of the EU are expected to formally approve the agreement on 26 April. Since the deal affects the Citizens Privacy Rights of all EU member states, some member states might require they will need their national parliamentary approval.  The dealif eventually accepted by all member states is said to replace the 2007 text and will apply for 7 years.

The obvious question that arises also is, "can the EU can require the US to provide the similar data from US citizens visiting the EU ?"

EU-Digest